A while ago, I sold the whole Nikon system (with a whole studio attached to it ), and got a D200, then D300, 12-24mm and 18-200mm.​

I thought that a D300, and glass from (effectively) 18mm to 300mm, in just 2 lenses, would be enough for personal use... Apparently, the photographers' dictionary doesn't include this word &#8211;'enough'...​

I lack the very top in optics, to which I got used along the years in the studio, and I lack an old love &#8211; Macro.​

As the focal range, which I tend to use most, is biased towards the Tele,choosing 'top optics' was simple: the 70-200 f/2.8.Together with a small 1.7TC, the lens covers from 105mm to 510mm. Good enough. (Eh... I used that word again... :blushing: )​

The Macro, however, can go in different directions -​

1) A Macro lens (105 or 200).​

2) Use just the 70-200. The TC gives it some close-up range.Extension rings give it Macro range.And, there's the zoom bonus.​

The second option saves weight, space in a bag, and money, so, unless I'd get a meaningful drop in quality, it's the preferred route.(Well, how bad can a tube, fitted with Nikon's top quality optical air, be? )​

In the studio, I used only prime lenses for Macro, so I have no
experience with a zoon + ex. tubes.

I'd be glad to hear your opinions/experience regarding the two options.​

hmm well I think you have to ask yourself where your need it - is it for a better 70-200mm f2.8 lens which with modification can do a bit of macro.
OR
Are you really hungering after macro and willing to continue to use the current lens you have.

hmm well I think you have to ask yourself where your need it -
is it for a better 70-200mm f2.8 lens which with modification
can do a bit of macro.
OR
Are you really hungering after macro and willing to continue to
use the current lens you have.

Click to expand...

I'll get the 70-200 anyway, hopefully in a week or so.

What I don't know, is whether the 70-200 with an extension tube will
have the same quality as the 105 or 200mm Macro lenses.
If the difference is barely visible, I'd go for tubes on the 70-200.
I just don't know if there's a real difference.

A dedicated macro lens should beat extension tubes for quality = depends though on what macro lens you go for. If you aim at the bottom market end or (though you are not) one of the telezoom macros then chances are the 70-200 will beat it.
however a good quality macro should be able to get better macro results.
You could try the 70-200 cheaply - as macro is done with manual focus anyway and all extension tubes are is adding air you can get the cheaper tubes rather than the official brand tubes.

hmm if you want a long dedicated macro why not look to the sigma line. There is the 150mm and 180mm macro lenses - not too much between them is cost and both will work well with (sigma) teleconverters to give you even more focal length